GIRDHARI S/O PREMSINH RAJPUROHIT vs GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - APP — 436/2025
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497,503. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 01st April 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJAH100040292025
Filing Number
436/2025
Filing Date
15-11-2025
Registration No
436/2025
Registration Date
15-11-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, VIRAMGAM
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
FIR Details
Police Station
VIRAMGAM- RAILWAY POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GIRDHARI S/O PREMSINH RAJPUROHIT
Adv. K D CHAVDA
Respondent(s)
GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
ORDER/JUDGEMENT
ORDER/JUDGEMENT
HEARING P.P.
HEARING P.P.
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-03-2026 | ORDER/JUDGEMENT |
| 25-03-2026 | ORDER/JUDGEMENT |
| 18-03-2026 | HEARING P.P. |
| 12-03-2026 | HEARING P.P. |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court granted the applicant's petition to recover 52 seized mobile phones under Section 497 of the CrPC. The applicant, a second-hand mobile phone dealer, had purchased the phones from Mumbai and provided bills proving ownership. The court found no grounds to doubt the applicant's ownership and accepted that police no longer needed the devices for investigation. The phones were conditionally released to the applicant on furnishing a bond equal to 1.5 times the declared value and adhering to specified conditions, including producing the materials when required and maintaining their current condition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court granted the applicant's petition to recover 52 seized mobile phones under Section 497 of the CrPC. The applicant, a second-hand mobile phone dealer, had purchased the phones from Mumbai and provided bills proving ownership. The court found no grounds to doubt the applicant's ownership and accepted that police no longer needed the devices for investigation. The phones were conditionally released to the applicant on furnishing a bond equal to 1.5 times the declared value and adhering to specified conditions, including producing the materials when required and maintaining their current condition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts